The Film Renter and Moving Picture News (May-Jun 1923)

ee . The Film Renter and —. | Moving Picture News ee ee ee LONDON Phone: Regent, 1468-9. TelegraphicAddress: ‘‘Wrightads, Westcent,London,’"’” MANCHESTER Phone: City, 5207. No. 503.° SATURDAY. JUNE 30. 1923. SIXPENCE. The Trades Council ¢ Publicity come into being again, is certainly losing no time in settling down to work, and its action in calling into conference leading publicity managers of the industry to devise ways and means whereby a greater public can be secured for the films is one to be commended, and certain to prove beneficial to the industry. At the last meeting of the Council the report of the Publicity Subcommittee, consisting of Mr. W. N. Blake, Colonel Bromhead and Mr. S. Rowson, was submitted, and makes extremely interesting reading. at in the report are undoubtedly sound, and there is in this report a real basis for a scheme which should be of extreme benefit to the whcle of the industry. Boiled down to essentials, the report indicates a need for advertising the trade to a far greater extent than heretofore, and lays especial stress upon securing greater publicity for films in the lay Press. It also advocates the desirability of a greater amount of posting throughout the country, and particularly urges the buying of space in the lay Press to publish articles by well known public men on the different aspects of the film industry. This, in the opinion of the Publicity Sub-committee, would be extremely effective, althongh somewhat costly. Other meuns of directing attenticn to the film industry are the convening of a film congress and the engaging of a special organisation to dea! with the matter as a whole. T= Cinematograph ‘lrades Council, now that it has The Tublicity Sub-committee, in drafting their report, have estimated that the cost of such an organisation would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of £2,000 a year, and we frankly think that this is the one weakness in the whole report. To commence a procecding such as is projected there must be more ample funds with which to carry it out. No one will deny that it is high time that a more serious effort was made to get a greater measure of publicity devoted to the film industry in the columns of the lay Press of this country. Thousands of pounds are spent each week by exhibitors, and little is seen in the news columns of the Press that is of any real interest to readers of daily and weekly newspapers. Is this the fault of the Press? Candidly, we do not think so. I'here has never been any attempt in this trade to organise a publicity bureau which would feed the Press of this country with real news items about pictures and their players: Before embarking on any really ambitious schemes the Cinematograph Trades Council might consider with advantage the desirability of first dealing with this one aspect only. In America the newspapers treat the film industry with every respect, and are only too glad at ail times to give a large measure of space in their columns to news stories from film producing houses and exhibitors. Over here, they have not been educated to the same extent, and it would therefore appear that before embarking upon any more far-reaching plans the Council might with advantage concentrate upon this one aspect alone: if successful they will have achieved a very great measure of success for this industry. The proposition to publish articles by well known public men on different aspects of the film industry does not appear fo us to be a very sound one, for not only will it be costiy, but, we doubt if it will be at all effective. There is a tendency among public writers to treat the film industry from a highbrow standpoint, and, consequently, such articles entirely fail to give the desired result. Advertising the trade by means of propaganda posters on the hoardings throughout the country is not a practical means of bringing a greater film public to the theatre. What should be done is that a greater amount of posters shouid be used by exhibitors themselves. . At the present inoment far too little use is made of the poster as a means of attracting the public’s attention, and if exhibitots were wise they would inake fur greater use of really good posters than they do at the present time. The matter of calling together a film congress so that the public attention might be focused is one that has long been advocated in this journal, but this is a matter that the C.T.C. might usefully consider at some later date. ‘the mein program that should be concentrated upon immediately is the incorporation of a real organisation which could ensure a greater amount of publicity being given to film matters in the daily Press. This is a matter that requires tackling at once, and will certainly cost more than £2,000 per year. It is no use dealing with this in a niggardly and paltry way. With some knowiedge of how much such an organisation would cost, we say emphatically that to expect to get this important werk done fer £2,000 per year is a grave mistake. Such a deparfment would be of inestimable value to the trade as a whole and of even greater value to the exhibitor. The Press of this country are cager to acquaint their readers with real news matter concerning the films that are put out each week. The exhibitor who spends his money in his local papers often expects the editor to send a reporter around which, more often than not, does not happen. Consequently he is not getting the return for his mcney to which he is entitled. It is no fault cf the paper, and if a department properly organised came into being it would soon be found the film industry was receiving a far greater amount of publicity in the Press. The Trades Co:meil is certainly doing good work in tackling these problems, and deserves the support of the entire industry.